Thuban more modular?

[Jonathan Coles]

what are people's thoughts on moving some of what is now
core-functionality into Extensions? i'm thinking specifically of
RasterLayer, but only because that's what i tend to play around with
most. we expect additional layer types to be extensions to thuban, but
why not make even our standard options behave as extensions for
consistency? there are some optimizations in place for rendering
(Shape)Layer objects that make the extraction harder, so i'm not going
to touch that right now.

in general, thuban should provide a very basic framework onto which all
the real functionality is added. the concept of a layer is part of that
framework, but specific implementations of that concept are extensions,
no?

--jonathan

-- 
=====================================================================
 Jonathan Coles                               http://www.jpcoles.com
 jonathan at jpcoles.com                    GnuPG Key: /gpg_pub_key.asc
=====================================================================